On the second anniversary of her son John’s fatal crash, Sharon Jobson hoped to spend a quiet moment at the railway crossing where his truck collided with a Via train.

The warning lights and gates she fought for would have just been installed — protecting her other son who still uses the crossing every day.

Finally, she thought, her family could be at peace.

But not now.

That anniversary — July 29 — has become the deadline for her to respond to a $500,000 lawsuit from CN Rail for the damage and train delays the crash caused.

Jobson, 50, was stunned when she was served with the lawsuit Tuesday at her home in Glencoe, Ont.

“We thought we had a happy ending. Lights and gates are going up in the next two weeks — they’ve already been delivered . . . I think everyone thought it was a good ending to a tragic story. This is just really a shock to everyone,” she said.

The lawsuit alleges that John Jobson, a 22-year-old farmer, caused the collision near Glencoe on July 29, 2011 through negligence.

He is “wholly responsible” for all damages, including track repair and the “bottleneck of rail traffic” caused by the crash, according to the statement of claim.

The document alleges that John failed to stop at the stop sign and was travelling “at an excessive rate of speed” over the Pratt Siding Road crossing, about 60 kms southwest of London.

“He created a situation of danger . . . (and) had a history of failing to stop at this crossing.”

The allegations in the statement of claim have not been proved in court. Sharon Jobson was served with the suit because she, as his executor, is his legal representative.

“As the matter is subject to litigation, CN has no comment,” CN spokesperson Mark Hallman told the Star.

Six people on the train carrying 116 passengers received minor injuries in the crash and the locomotive and all four coaches derailed, said
the Transportation Safety Board report
released last year. John was airlifted to a hospital where he died six days later.

His was the second death at this crossing; Gloyde Mills was killed there in 1998.

The report, which concluded that John did not stop at the stop sign, also said buildings and vegetation alongside the track “prevented the vehicle driver and the train crew from noticing each other well in advance of the crossing.”

“Some of the signs were not installed at the recommended height and were not well maintained,” the report adds.

The train’s horn, which was sounded continuously to warn John, was also not yet retrofitted to be positioned at the front of the train rather than the middle

Friends and acquaintances of Jobson, including the sister of Mills, expressed their surprise and outrage at the lawsuit on her Facebook wall.

It’s “disgusting, sickening and heart-wrenching,” says one comment. “Absolutely unbelievable, the callousness of these big corporations,” says another. A third calls it a “money-grab.”

The comments also remind her that the rural community is standing behind her, as they have through municipal meetings, petitions to the House of Commons to improve safety at all rural railway crossings and letter-writing campaigns.

As a result, CN Rail, Transport Canada and the municipality of Southwest Middlesex committed $400,000 to improvements at the Pratt Siding Road crossing. Those include elevating the crossing and clearing away brush and trees, as well as installing the warning lights and gates as recommended in Transport Canada guidelines.

Jobson is waiting for her lawyer to return from vacation next week to find out what her next steps will be.

The family chose not launch a lawsuit against CN Rail last year, she said.

“We were happy with getting some safety measures in place. We never were seeking anything financial,” she said.

“I was hoping to have some peace with the lights and the safety measures in place but that won’t be happening too soon.”

Correction - July 11, 2013:
This article was edited from a previous version that included an incorrect headline that said CN sued the mother.

Commenting on this story has been closed
.

More on thestar.com

We value respectful and thoughtful discussion. Readers are encouraged to flag comments that fail to meet the standards outlined in our
Community Code of Conduct.
For further information, including our legal guidelines, please see our full website
Terms and Conditions.